Waste of money /dwindling defense resources. Nimitz still exceeds anything any future enemy has will have fro a long time. We could even afford and should downgrade to a smaller size to something along there Forestall or even the UK's Queen Elizabeth class and still out class everything else and meet our needs.

Old ship need to be replaced and yes we need to expand our navy but this is not the way to do it.

The Ford is a nice to have but unrealistic want in the face of a more pressing National Security issue-the National Debt.

itsaidwhat:You'd think the "goal" would be less explosions, fireballs, death, destruction and general mayhem on deck during landings. But what do I know about programming software.

They've already got that down pretty low, so now they're going for less wear and tear. The launch and recovery system on that ship is also built to accommodate drones- right now, the steam catapults on our other carriers would tear them apart, but the electromagnetic ones can be programmed to however much force you need. And the software controlled arresting gear is kinda important for drones as well.

It's a substantial upgrade on the Nimitz class, and better configured to modern warfare. This thing is planned to stay in service for about 60 years, they need to plan ahead. Can't keep building Nimitzes. Also, aircraft carriers are about projecting power, which is why we have so many. A US Aircraft carrier parked near the South China Sea ensures that the various parties in the South China Sea don't start lobbing missiles at each other. Which would probably have already happened if the US wasn't there.

The world cop bit gets a bad rap because we've used it as an excuse to invade small nations on a few occasions. But somebody has to walk the beat, and right now it's us. It would be great if international tensions didn't exist and we all got along. Someday, we may be there. The overall trend of World History makes me think that we will. But just like in policing, you need to be there if anything starts going wrong, and people need to know you're there if things start going wrong. Should it just be the US? Hell no. Other nations need to chip in, and that's been a long term effort in US Diplomacy, and it's paying off. Several European nations are ramping up their military spending so they can help out. Japan is taking on additional responsibilities for that region. Which might be a bit of a fox guarding the henhouse deal considering their interests in the region, but we trust them. But it takes time to design and build the infrastructure. Right now, we're the ones doing it because we're the only ones who CAN do it.

Military power is necessary to keep the world peaceful, and that's really been the job of the US in recent decades. We use diplomacy, we use economic power, and we use military power, usually just as a deterrent and a calming influence that keeps people from doing stupid things in the first place. Just remember what happened the last time we had an isolationist streak and withdrew from world affairs.

cptjeff:itsaidwhat: You'd think the "goal" would be less explosions, fireballs, death, destruction and general mayhem on deck during landings. But what do I know about programming software.

They've already got that down pretty low, so now they're going for less wear and tear. The launch and recovery system on that ship is also built to accommodate drones- right now, the steam catapults on our other carriers would tear them apart, but the electromagnetic ones can be programmed to however much force you need. And the software controlled arresting gear is kinda important for drones as well.

It's a substantial upgrade on the Nimitz class, and better configured to modern warfare. This thing is planned to stay in service for about 60 years, they need to plan ahead. Can't keep building Nimitzes. Also, aircraft carriers are about projecting power, which is why we have so many. A US Aircraft carrier parked near the South China Sea ensures that the various parties in the South China Sea don't start lobbing missiles at each other. Which would probably have already happened if the US wasn't there.

The world cop bit gets a bad rap because we've used it as an excuse to invade small nations on a few occasions. But somebody has to walk the beat, and right now it's us. It would be great if international tensions didn't exist and we all got along. Someday, we may be there. The overall trend of World History makes me think that we will. But just like in policing, you need to be there if anything starts going wrong, and people need to know you're there if things start going wrong. Should it just be the US? Hell no. Other nations need to chip in, and that's been a long term effort in US Diplomacy, and it's paying off. Several European nations are ramping up their military spending so they can help out. Japan is taking on additional responsibilities for that region. Which might be a bit of a fox guarding the henhouse deal considering their interests in the region, but we trust them. But it ...